I suppose I'm minimalist in the sense that I don't like buying/keeping things that have no use or value. That said, the author of the article seems to practice consumerism of a different variety rather than completely abandon the concept. Affluence permits wants in addition to needs; no ones needs a 5000 sq ft house, but no one needs to travel the globe, either. The line he draws seems arbitrary, and more colored by his personal ambivalence to clutter than the actual idea of consumerism.
Maybe Mr. Hill feels happier now, because his modes of consumption are not just monetary transactions (buying/selling), but are now also transactions of time, emotional content, etc. ("doing")
Originally Posted by DesignerValet
the author of the article seems to practice consumerism of a different variety rather than completely abandon the concept.
Indeed, he never said anything about spending less money, he just thinks that what he spends his money on is better than what most other people spend their money on. (He is also plugging his latest business venture, presumably so he can earn more money to spend on the things he enjoys.)
Elizabeth W. Dunn, Daniel T. Gilbert, Timothy D. Wilson
Journal of Consumer Psychology 21 (2011) 115–125
The relationship between money and happiness is surprisingly weak, which may stem in part from the way people spend it. Drawing on
empirical research, we propose eight principles designed to help consumers get more happiness for their money. Specifically, we suggest that
consumers should (1) buy more experiences and fewer material goods; (2) use their money to benefit others rather than themselves; (3) buy many
small pleasures rather than fewer large ones; (4) eschew extended warranties and other forms of overpriced insurance; (5) delay consumption;
(6) consider how peripheral features of their purchases may affect their day-to-day lives; (7) beware of comparison shopping; and (8) pay close
attention to the happiness of others.